WASHINGTON — Political rivals eagerly bashed Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson in her last two campaigns over her mishandling of Congressional Black Caucus Foundation scholarship funds a few years back.

But at least one source has officially forgotten the matter: Wikipedia.

The entry for the Dallas Democrat in the online, open-source encyclopedia has been scrubbed clean of any reference to the scholarship scandal — twice.

There is no evidence that Johnson is behind any of the changes to her Wikipedia entry or was even aware of the alterations. Aides and supporters say she had nothing to do with the biographical airbrushing.

In 2010, The News reported that Johnson had awarded 23 scholarships over five years to two of her grandsons, two sons of her nephew, and the children of her top congressional aide in Dallas. All of the recipients were ineligible under anti-nepotism and residency rules.

Johnson later repaid the foundation more than $31,000.

The person behind the Wikipedia deletions used the name “boysinclair” when signed into the site. Someone using the name Boy Sinclair has defended Johnson in comments on The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, using a Facebook profile linked to an associate editor by that name at 1814 Magazine.

Detractors such as campaign consultant Jason Stanford — who worked for one of Johnson’s opponents in last year’s Democratic primary, Taj Clayton — called it “stupid” to expect the changes to go unnoticed.

“To the general public, the only person that has the motivation to do this is the congresswoman or someone very close to her,” he said. “It looks like someone is trying to scrub history.”

The scholarship scandal drew national attention. A Wikipedia contributor added details to Johnson’s entry one day after publication of the first article about the scholarships in August 2010.

Information on the scandal remained in Johnson’s entry until June 2012, when “boysinclair” deleted the relevant paragraphs, during a two-hour session in which other, generally favorable, information was added.

Another Wikipedia user restored the scandal references in October.

The next month, after Johnson easily won an 11th term, “boysinclair” wiped the page again.

Wikipedia records show that Johnson’s entry was the only one “boysinclair” has altered. The same user created a Wikipedia page for 1814 Magazine that was deleted because it was deemed advertising.

Efforts to contact Sinclair through the magazine and his Facebook profile were unsuccessful.

Eddie Reeves, a former campaign spokesman for Johnson, called the inquiry about the scrubbed page a “witch hunt” and an effort to “manufacture a story.”

“I don’t even know if she knows what Wikipedia is,” he said.

He noted her wide margins of victory over GOP nominee Stephen Broden in November 2010, two Democratic primary opponents last year, and another Republican foe in November.

“This has been litigated in not one but two elections,” Reeves said. “I will give you guys credit. I have never seen so creative a way to beat a horse that is not just dead but has decomposed.”

“It certainly is indicative of the character of a person we expect to have a level of integrity and honesty,” he said. “It is a significant part of who she is and the character that is representing us.”

Wikipedia itself discourages “conflict of interest” editing. A number of politicians have been embarrassed by efforts to cleanse their pages, including Sen. Joe Biden, who removed descriptions of his past plagiarism scandal in 2006, as he was preparing to run for president.

Phil Gomes — co-founder of Corporate Representatives for Ethical Wikipedia Engagement, a group created last year by public relations professionals and others — said it’s considered “improper” to edit an entry when that might pose a conflict of interest.

Anyone with close ties to the subject of a Wikipedia entry should request changes via its “talk” tab, he said. That puts the issue before a broader online community.

“I would advise a client to be upfront about well-known issues,” Gomes said.